Management Consultant/business Advisor
E-hr, Digital Hr, Hris, Training & Development,
Management Consultant
Psychologist/outbound Trainer

Cite.Co is a repository of information and resources created by industry seniors and experts sharing their real world insights. Join Network
Dear fellow HR practitioners,
Hope all of you are well enough! Im posting this new queries regarding: Conduct post-training performance monitoring. Hope you people can assist me in details regarding this topic.
Thanks and best regards,

From Malaysia, Ipoh



It is important to conduct post training evaluation and monitoring of the

Performance , in order to assess its effectiveness in producing the learning

Outcomes specified when the training intervention was planned, and

To indicate where the improvements or changes are required to make

The training more effective.

The basis upon which each category of training is to be evaluated should be determined at the planning stage. At the same time, it is necessary to consider how the information required to evaluate learning events, should be obtained and analysed.

The process of evaluating training has been defined as Any attempt to obtain information (feedback) on the effects of a training programme, and to assess the value of the training in the light of that information.' Evaluation leads to control, which means deciding whether or not the training was worthwhile (preferably in cost benefit terms) and what improvements are required to make it even more cost effective.

Evaluation is an integral feature of training. In its crudest form, it is the comparison of objectives (criterion behaviour) with outcomes (terminal behaviour) to answer the question how far the training has achieved its purpose. The setting of objectives and the establishment of methods of measuring results are, or should be, an essential part of the planning stage of any training programme.

Training can be measured with respect to three sets of criteria:

1.In course evalution of participants' progress. This is an appraisal of the effects

of training at the "training room" level. More specifically it

involves an assessment of:

a) increased knowledge;

b) acquired skills;

c) changes in expressed attitudes;

d) indications of interest;

e) degree of participation;

f) acceptance of training given.

In short, this set of criteria is used to measure the effectiveness of the training

as a process.

2. Impact on the participants after training. This is an appraisal of the effects of training as revealed by subsequent, modified behavior on the job. It involves measures of: a) the transfer of instruction into changed behaviors and attitudes on the job; b) the extent and duration of such change; C) whether the changes are positive, contributing to improved efficiency, production, and employee satisfaction; d) whether progress has been made in meeting the specific objectives of the training. This set of criteria is used to determine the effect of the training on people in the organization.

3. Impact on the organization. This involves a determination of theextent to which training has played a part in organizational success. The kinds of things that indicate significant contributions to organizational success include: a) an improved supervisory and management force; b) improved interdepartmental functioning; c) improved productivity and morale; d) improved communication, vertically and horizontally; e) greater customer or public satisfaction with goods produced or services rendered;

f) an adequate reservoir of talent to meet present promotion and future expansion needs.

Training evaluation involves measuring the effectiveness of a training program in terms of four criteria:

1. Reaction How well did the participants like the program?

2. Learning What principles, facts, and techniques were learned7

3. Behavior What changes in job behavior resulted from the training7

4. Results What were the tangible results of the training program in terms

of reduced cost, improved quality, improved quantity, etc.

1. Reactions Reactions of participants to the learning experience and to those who presented it (i.e., coordinators and teachers). Reactions of program coordinator and the various teachers in the program regarding the learning environment and experience. Reactions consist of opinions and conclusions based on first hand observations. They may be collected during, immediately after, or several months after the training occurs.

2. Learning Measures of changes in attitudes, knowledge, and skills of the trainees. These changes may be measured immediately after the training experience to determine a program's immediate impact and several weeks or months later to measure retention.

3. Job behavior An assessment of how trainees behave differently because of their training. The biggest question this aspect of the evaluation process aims to answer is, how and to what extent have trainees applied the various concepts and processes taught7 It also seeks to determine who among the trainees have been changed as a result of the training.

4. Organizational impact This involves assessing the effects of attitude and behavioral changes caused by the training on both the functioning and t

ability to function of the organization to which the trainees belong. The aim of this phase of evaluation is to ascertain both quantitative and qualitative changes in organizational performance which can be attributed to the training directly or indirectly.

5. Additional outcomes Other results or by products of the training not identified or assessed by the other four areas. This includes such things as the social value of training. To what extent do trainees feel better about themselves? Has the training helped people satisfy some of their personal goals? Has it assisted them in their career development? Whereas organizational impact refers to an assessment of contributions of training to the organization's performance or capacity to perform along the lines or in the direction it has chosen to head or would like to head, the assessment of additional outcomes involves an examination of the impacts training has had on the organization's performance or capacity to perform with respect to measures it presently does not use.



A logical approach to collecting, organizing, and interpreting evaluation data is necessary in order to provide useful information to those who need it. A couple of important questions should be raised. The first question that should be answered when planning how a training intervention will be evaluated is "Who needs what kinds of evaluation information?" There must be some reason or reasons why these various people want particular kinds of evaluation information. These people should know what they will do with this information once they get it. The one exception to this is when training produces unanticipated results that have significance and, therefore, should be assessed and included in the evaluation report.

A second question that needs to be answered is, "What are the various ways one can go about collecting the needed information?" There are sometimes various ways of collecting essentially the same kinds of information.

Gathering and Interpreting Reactions to Training

The most commonly used method of evaluating training is to collect participant reactions to it. This approach to evaluation is simple, fast, and straightforward. It does suffer, however, from a major fallacy because of the ways in which the information generated is frequently interpreted.

The reactions of participants, the program's coordinator, and the program's instructor are a useful source of information to help assess the acceptance of and support for training, to evaluate training as a process, and to identify perceptions of what was learned or accomplished. Typical questions which reactions to training can go a long way in answering include the following:

1. Will training get, or continue to get, support from those for whom it is intended and their superiors? Is it perceived as being useful? If those who experience training react favorably, it seems likely that they will support it and will encourage others to support it. To get this kind of information, participants could be asked what their overall reaction to the training was; whether they felt it was worthwhile in terms of its cost and their time away from work; how well it measured up to their expectations; and whether they think others would profit from it.

2. Was the training relevant7 Did it meet the needs of the participants?These questions may be answered by obtaining the reactions of participants and perhaps the reactions of some of their superiors who have first hand knowledge of the training. The kinds of things that need to be determined in answering these questions are: Was the training practicaI7 Was it thorough?Did it contain new and useful ideas? Which of the topics were most helpful?Which were least helpful? Which topics should be expanded7 Which ones reduced or eliminated? Should other topics be included which are not now included?

3. Was the quality of teaching acceptable7 Were there any problems with the ways in which the various instructors performed? What can instructors do to improve? These and similar questions may be answered by collecting reactions from participants and the program coordinator.

4. Were the teaching methods and materials stimulating and effective7 Was the quality and quantity of the materials appropriate? Here, the perceptions of participants should comprise the primary source of data. This can be supplemented with the perceptions of instructors and the program coordinator. The kinds of questions that should be asked here are: Which of the teaching methods most helped learning7 Which ones least helped learning7 Which cases and readings were most useful7 Which ones were least usefu17 Which ones should be eliminated7

5. Were the physical facilities and the services employed satisfactory7 This question is asked to determine whether the facilities and services used were of a quality so as to add to and not detract from the learning that the program was designed to produce. Opinions from participants, the program coordinator and the various teachers should be polled to determine both positive and negative aspects of the conference room, sleeping accommodations, meals, meal service, transportation, and recreational facilities.

6. Was the program well planned and organized7 Were its many parts and phases well coordinated7 The purpose of asking these kinds of questions is to spot problems that can detract from a good learning situation. Here, participants should be polled to see if they felt the program ran smoothly and without irritating annoyances, delays, and foul ups which can quickly and decisively sour a group's attitude and enthusiasm toward the learning experience. Included here might also be questions aimed at finding out how thorough and timely were the many communications which were used to tell participants of the daily activities and where and when they were to occur.

7. What did the participants perceive they learned7 Perceptions of what someone thinks he or she learned are important because they indicate what that person felt he or she gained from the learning experience and, hence, what he or she will be likely to tell others when explaining what the training was

that has caused these changes and not other factors.

The following guidelines should be observed in studying and evaluating behavioral changes:

1.Systematically study and appraise on the job behavior before the training.

2.Clearly determine and specify the behavioral changes sought.

3.Identify and specify the evidences necessary to satisfactorily determine whether or the extent to which changes have occurred.

4.Plan how this evidence will be collected.

5.Systematically study and appraise on the job behavior three months or more after the training. This will allow trainees the opportunity to apply what they have learned. Additional studies later on may add to the validity of earlier findings.

6.Obtain evidence from as many of the following groups as practical.

a) those who receive the training

b) the trainees' superiors

c] the trainees' subordinates

d) the trainees' peers

e) others in the organization who have frequent contact with the trainees.

7. Compare before and after training performance. Use both quantitative and qualitative measures.

8.Relate changes to training. If it is not possible to reason why or how particular changes could be caused by the training, then seriously question whether they

were and consider the possibility that they were caused by other factors.

9.A control group (or groups) not receiving the training should be used.

10.Use small groups or committees to review evidences and prepare a report on the changes. All claims that changes have occurred should be fully supported by evidences and reasons.


The more systematic and objective the process of measuring learning Becomes , the greater the credibility of the conclusions as to the extentTo which training resulted in any learning. There are three broad Approaches.

1.A common sense approach , which essentially involves a nonsystemicallycollected sample of feelings, opinions, and conclusions based on observations.

2.A systematic approach, which consists of collecting indicators and evidences.The evidences to be collected is decided upon in advance before the Training occurs . It includes judgements which can be shown to be Logically derived from observations and inferences. These may be collected By means of interviews , questionnaires, and group discussions.

3. An experimental approach, which attempts to study changes of knowledge,skills, and attitudes under controlled conditions.



From India, Mumbai
Dear Leo, I think giving thanks is not enough for the support you already showed. Hope your reply will help the new HR personnel engaged in training and development. Wish you all the best.
From Malaysia, Ipoh
This is an excellent approach; not only well constructed, but well thought through--plaudits on not only the structure but the thought process.
If you have never been published, you should seriously consider the opportunity.
My first book covering Human Resources issues will be out in about two weeks--the book I've written is one on Comparative Interviewing and Analysis, along with Hiring and Interviewing techniques.
I'm very impressed with this analyis, however, and if you haven't written, you should seriously consider doing so.
Would you allow me to include elements of this in my Training Analyses Explanation for attendees at our Seminars? Attribution, of course, would be forthcoming in all cases.
Alan Guinn, Managing Director
The Guinn Consultancy Group, Inc.

From United States, Bluff City
APPRECIATE your comments.
Just as information, my strengths / competence are in this order
In the top three, as a management trainer/ business coach,
I have written a lot of materials.
BUT in HRM, I have not written any materials. I have made
many contributions to various other sites like this CITEHR
etc etc.
Regarding using my materials, you can use it . It is at your

From India, Mumbai
Wooops...!!! That was wonderful...Brought much more theoretical clarity in this field. We have been doing training assesments but with your writing we can now systematically go about doing the same. You have filled in some loopholes. I admire the simple and effective articulation.
Mamta Kapoor

From India, Panipat
This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.

About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2020 Cite.Co